Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Unknown Territories
    Joined
    05 Dec '05
    Moves
    20408
    23 May '17 01:51
    I should have given you so much evidence, you wouldn't want to deny it.
    Instead, it's piece, here, a piece there, and from what I've gathered from you, it's really just a bit light on irrefutable and a scosh less than the full load.

    Forgive me.

    Let's try this one, k?

    YouTube
  2. Standard memberHandyAndy
    Non sum qualis eram
    At the edge
    Joined
    23 Sep '06
    Moves
    18031
    23 May '17 01:58
    Originally posted by FreakyKBH
    I should have given you so much evidence, you wouldn't want to deny it.
    Instead, it's piece, here, a piece there, and from what I've gathered from you, it's really just a bit light on irrefutable and a scosh less than the full load.

    Forgive me.

    Let's try this one, k?

    [youtube]MTOQMh6rNZQ[/youtube]
    Beware of Freaks bearing gifts.
  3. Unknown Territories
    Joined
    05 Dec '05
    Moves
    20408
    23 May '17 02:08
    Originally posted by HandyAndy
    Beware of Freaks bearing gifts.
    ... here, kitty-kitty...
  4. Standard memberkaroly aczel
    The Axe man
    Brisbane,QLD
    Joined
    11 Apr '09
    Moves
    92189
    23 May '17 02:55
    Originally posted by FreakyKBH
    ... here, kitty-kitty...
    So Manchester when it sizzles , eh?

    It seems I'm having trouble starting a new thread, so I'll just post this here.

    What do you think Freaky? Another fraud?

    All i'll say is at least the IRS gave 'em warning before exploding bombs. They aimed up at soldiers, not kids at a concert.

    What do you guys think?
  5. Unknown Territories
    Joined
    05 Dec '05
    Moves
    20408
    23 May '17 03:07
    Originally posted by karoly aczel
    So Manchester when it sizzles , eh?

    It seems I'm having trouble starting a new thread, so I'll just post this here.

    What do you think Freaky? Another fraud?

    All i'll say is at least the IRS gave 'em warning before exploding bombs. They aimed up at soldiers, not kids at a concert.

    What do you guys think?
    Haven't looked yet, sorry.
  6. Standard memberkaroly aczel
    The Axe man
    Brisbane,QLD
    Joined
    11 Apr '09
    Moves
    92189
    23 May '17 03:09
    Originally posted by FreakyKBH
    Haven't looked yet, sorry.
    I look forward to your comments 🙂
  7. Joined
    29 Dec '08
    Moves
    6788
    23 May '17 04:20
    Originally posted by FreakyKBH
    Haven't looked yet, sorry.
    So what do you make of people who haven't looked at your YouTube cites "yet?"
  8. Subscriberkmax87
    Land of Free
    Health and Education
    Joined
    09 Oct '04
    Moves
    82196
    23 May '17 04:31
    Originally posted by FreakyKBH
    ... here, kitty-kitty...
    You do realize that Mr Denmark et Sweden's camera is not 1m above sea level right?? And yet all his calcs are based on a 1m above sea level. If you cannot judge for yourself that the camera height is much more than 1m above the sea level, not above the jetty level which is clearly more than 1m above the sea lapping at the shore below, then I got nothing for you, but in case you missed it, all his calcs are bogus because he is not literally 1m above sea level. Get him to stand with his toe at the waters edge and shoot from the hip, and get the same results and I would believe....

    And why do flat earthers who have spent a lot of their time debunking direct flights from Sydney to South America ( 10 hrs last time I looked) continue to claim that you can't actually get a direct flight against all the evidence to the contrary that people are doing just that, flying Sydney to Santiago in 10 hrs which would be impossible according to the flat earth distance, unless of course the airline industry has being lying about the max cruise speed of passenger aircraft all along.
  9. Standard membershavixmir
    Guppy poo
    Sewers of Holland
    Joined
    31 Jan '04
    Moves
    56290
    23 May '17 05:03
    Originally posted by FreakyKBH
    I should have given you so much evidence, you wouldn't want to deny it.
    Instead, it's piece, here, a piece there, and from what I've gathered from you, it's really just a bit light on irrefutable and a scosh less than the full load.

    Forgive me.

    Let's try this one, k?

    [youtube]MTOQMh6rNZQ[/youtube]
    Is this supposed to prove anything other than the filmer is rubbish at whatever he's doing?
  10. Standard memberLundos
    Back to basics
    About
    Joined
    11 Dec '04
    Moves
    68866
    23 May '17 05:09
    Originally posted by FreakyKBH
    I should have given you so much evidence, you wouldn't want to deny it.
    Instead, it's piece, here, a piece there, and from what I've gathered from you, it's really just a bit light on irrefutable and a scosh less than the full load.

    Forgive me.

    Let's try this one, k?

    [youtube]MTOQMh6rNZQ[/youtube]
    Nice to see a video from my old neighborhood.
    But that's about the nicest thing I can say about this bs.
  11. Unknown Territories
    Joined
    05 Dec '05
    Moves
    20408
    23 May '17 07:22
    Originally posted by kmax87
    You do realize that Mr Denmark et Sweden's camera is not 1m above sea level right?? And yet all his calcs are based on a 1m above sea level. If you cannot judge for yourself that the camera height is much more than 1m above the sea level, not above the jetty level which is clearly more than 1m above the sea lapping at the shore below, then I got nothing for ...[text shortened]... the airline industry has being lying about the max cruise speed of passenger aircraft all along.
    He's down at the water, so I don't know that I would quibble too much about his calculation, but just for chips and giggles, let's put a pencil to it.

    For the chimney example, if he should have calculated 6' instead (and we have no real reason to think so, since the beginning shows he's down at water level), he's off by 15'--- as in 15' less loss than reported.
    Does that look like 15' worth of difference in the zoomed in version?

    For the water tower at 276', he's got the loss at 203' and at 6' it would be 18' less, to 185'.
    The water tower should show only the top 91', but that's clearly not the case.

    Grain silos he has at 154' but take it to 139' and the results are about the same.
    You'd only be able to see about 15' of the top of the silos, but, again, this is not the case.

    Conclusion: if he's off, it's not by much, and certainly nowhere near significant enough to erase the overall results.
  12. Standard memberkaroly aczel
    The Axe man
    Brisbane,QLD
    Joined
    11 Apr '09
    Moves
    92189
    23 May '17 08:011 edit
    Originally posted by FreakyKBH
    He's down at the water, so I don't know that I would quibble too much about his calculation, but just for chips and giggles, let's put a pencil to it.

    For the chimney example, if he should have calculated 6' instead (and we have no real reason to think so, since the beginning shows he's down at water level), he's off by 15'--- as in 15' less loss than r ...[text shortened]... f, it's not by much, and certainly nowhere near significant enough to erase the overall results.
    So did the gig in Manchester get bombed or ...?

    Based on the pics it could be another stich up ,no?
  13. Unknown Territories
    Joined
    05 Dec '05
    Moves
    20408
    23 May '17 08:03
    Originally posted by karoly aczel
    So did the gig in Manchester get bombed or ...
    Start another thread and discuss.
  14. Standard memberkaroly aczel
    The Axe man
    Brisbane,QLD
    Joined
    11 Apr '09
    Moves
    92189
    23 May '17 08:06
    Originally posted by FreakyKBH
    Start another thread and discuss.
    Could you do it please??

    I told you earlier that I'm having trouble starting a new thread.

    It's this format, I'm not used to yet.

    You start the thread and I'll post there 🙂
  15. Standard memberkaroly aczel
    The Axe man
    Brisbane,QLD
    Joined
    11 Apr '09
    Moves
    92189
    23 May '17 08:17
    Seriously I cant find the 'new thread' tab.
    Usually I'm on google chrome but this is windows explorer I believe.

    Surely some one will start a thread on this soon so I can bail from this thread .
Back to Top